Senator Al Franken Kissed and Groped Me Without My Consent, And There’s Nothing Funny

xjx388 said:
"Respecting their experiences," doesn't seem to make any sense when their experiences are not a reflection of reality.
Click to expand...
Why not?

It is a reflection of their reality. At no time does he apologize for it being his reality other than to respect he might have been (inadvertently) responsible for creating their reality.
 
Last edited:
"Every perspective should be validated and affirmed."

put another way

"How dare you, now you listen to me and get this through your thick skull!"
 
Delphic Oracle said:
I like how Franken's apology was too weak and yet also he shouldn't have apologized at all depending on which is more convenient at the moment.
Click to expand...


I think it is less what's convenient and more based on what actually happened, or even what Franken believes actually happened. If he didn't grab anyone's butt then he has no reason to apologize and every right to say the women are lying. I can accept that. If he did cop a feel and is truly sorry then he should make a firm, straightforward apology. I can accept that too. The weak apology implies that yeah, he did grab a butt or two and doesn't want to call someone a liar, but he doesn't really want to admit it. It's a wishy-washy middle ground.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Why not?

It is a reflection of their reality. At no time does he apologize for it being his reality other than to respect he might have been (inadvertently) responsible for creating their reality.
Click to expand...

Uhhhhh.......wut?

There is only one reality. He either did something inappropriate or he did not. He doesn't have to apologize for other people's perceptions of reality.

Woman: xjx388 raped me!

xjx388: I don't recall this incident but we have to listen to women when they come forward and we must respect their experiences. I just feel horrible that this woman's reality includes me raping her and I apologize for inadvertently helping create this reality.

Police: Sir, we have a few questions for you . . .
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
You say that and then go on to assume his apologies are based on guilt and not based on respecting the accusers' experiences.
Click to expand...

First off, the very idea of apologizing based on respecting the accusers' experiences is ludicrous as I tried to illustrate in my last post.

Secondly, I am only saying that an actual apology includes taking responsibility. "I'm sorry," is meaningless if it isn't coupled with an understanding of what you are sorry for. My wife points this out to me quite often!

"I'm sorry you feel bad about what you think I did." What the hell does that even mean? If you did nothing, there is nothing to apologize for.
 
xjx388 said:
First off, the very idea of apologizing based on respecting the accusers' experiences is ludicrous as I tried to illustrate in my last post.

Secondly, I am only saying that an actual apology includes taking responsibility. "I'm sorry," is meaningless if it isn't coupled with an understanding of what you are sorry for. My wife points this out to me quite often!

"I'm sorry you feel bad about what you think I did." What the hell does that even mean? If you did nothing, there is nothing to apologize for.
Click to expand...


That's why, when someone tells you they are "sorry for your loss" at a funeral, everyone understands that to be an admission of guilt for the death.
 
quadraginta said:
That's why, when someone tells you they are "sorry for your loss" at a funeral, everyone understands that to be an admission of guilt for the death.
Click to expand...

That is ridiculous. "Sorry for your loss," is a cliché that we all know the meaning of. It's what we say when we don't know what else to say.

"Sorry for how you feel about something I didn't do," doesn't even make any sense.
 
Monza said:
I think it is less what's convenient and more based on what actually happened, or even what Franken believes actually happened. If he didn't grab anyone's butt then he has no reason to apologize and every right to say the women are lying. I can accept that. If he did cop a feel and is truly sorry then he should make a firm, straightforward apology. I can accept that too. The weak apology implies that yeah, he did grab a butt or two and doesn't want to call someone a liar, but he doesn't really want to admit it. It's a wishy-washy middle ground.
Click to expand...

Those are the only two possibilities?

And there's no inherent pitfalls in either?

Then stop pretending this is "straightforward."
 
Delphic Oracle said:
Those are the only two possibilities?

And there's no inherent pitfalls in either?

Then stop pretending this is "straightforward."
Click to expand...


Possibility 1 - He knows that it's possible that he may have inadvertently touched butts even if he doesn't specifically recall doing it: "I apologize for touching your butt. It was completely inadvertent, I had absolutely no sexual intent and I will certainly be a lot more careful in the future."

Possibility 2 - He knows that no butt was touched by him: "I deny these allegations."

Possibility 3 - He knows he did it: "I apologize for touching your butt. It was completely inappropriate and a violation of your integrity. I need to be a better person and I will make that effort going forward."

What other plausible possibility exists?

Of course, all of these responses have pitfalls. This is a big problem: How in the world is anyone supposed to respond to allegations that are impossible to prove or disprove? These are career ruining (or at least tainting) allegations. While I think it's important for bad behavior to come to light, we have no way of properly vetting these accusations. We need to find a way to encourage true stories to come out while at the same time strongly discouraging false accusations from seeing the light of day. Unfortunately, I think that's impossible, so we are stuck with either 1)strongly denying false accusations and maybe suing for defamation; or 2)acknowledging the bad behavior, apologizing and facing whatever consequences come your way.

The other option is, of course, to ignore accusations that are presented without proof. This has its own pitfalls and given the sensationalism-driven media also impossible.
 
Delphic Oracle said:
I like how Franken's apology was too weak and yet also he shouldn't have apologized at all depending on which is more convenient at the moment.
Click to expand...
Enh. I thought Franken's apology was kinda weak, but probably the right play given the circumstances. Ultimately it's up to his constituents to judge whether it's good enough.

But now Skeptic Ginger has introduced a whole new critical theory, which opens the door to different interpretations not previously considered.
 
quadraginta said:
That's why, when someone tells you they are "sorry for your loss" at a funeral, everyone understands that to be an admission of guilt for the death.
Click to expand...
That's a figure of speech that only causes problems for poorly trained robots.

Real people who are competent in natural languages have no trouble understanding the differences between a conventional expression of condolences, and a sincere apology for wrongdoing, even if they phrases seem superficially similar.

But you knew that already.
 
xjx388 said:
That is ridiculous. "Sorry for your loss," is a cliché that we all know the meaning of. It's what we say when we don't know what else to say.

"Sorry for how you feel about something I didn't do," doesn't even make any sense.
Click to expand...

Which is exactly the way I felt over forty years ago when total strangers came up to me at my mother's funeral and said, "I'm sorry for your loss."

It didn't make any sense. They didn't know me, and many of them didn't even know her. Few of the ones that did had even so much as talked to her in years.

(At the time I was not in a good state of mind. I had been working out of state when she was killed. My mother was relatively young (42), and her death (from a brutal car accident) entirely unexpected.

Total strangers saying insanely nonsensical thing to me pissed me off to the point of near rage. I had to remove myself from the ceremony, and I've never been able to bring myself to go to another one since then.)

Saying "I'm sorry about how you feel." is exactly the same thing. The same figure of speech. (Not necessarily a cliche.)

No, it isn't "I'm sorry I made you feel that way.", which still isn't "I'm sorry I did that to you".

Nonetheless, as a figure of speech those first usages are identical, and as you yourself point out, quite commonly accepted for what they intend, which is an expression of sympathy.
 
Monza said:
I think it is less what's convenient and more based on what actually happened, or even what Franken believes actually happened. If he didn't grab anyone's butt then he has no reason to apologize and every right to say the women are lying. I can accept that. If he did cop a feel and is truly sorry then he should make a firm, straightforward apology. I can accept that too. The weak apology implies that yeah, he did grab a butt or two and doesn't want to call someone a liar, but he doesn't really want to admit it. It's a wishy-washy middle ground.
Click to expand...
And if he didn't cop a feel but he doesn't want to call the women liars because they mistakenly believe he did?

Not everyone who is wrong is a liar, but notice how that seems to be the only option people believe Franken has: accuse the women of lying or you must have done it.

Like I said, xjx388, you just don't get it.
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
That's a figure of speech that only causes problems for poorly trained robots.

Real people who are competent in natural languages have no trouble understanding the differences between a conventional expression of condolences, and a sincere apology for wrongdoing, even if they phrases seem superficially similar.

But you knew that already.
Click to expand...


Sure. I did.

You're directing your comment to the wrong person. You should be directing it toward xjx388, who seems unable to grasp that the same "I'm sorry for ..." convention can apply to other things as well.
 
xjx388 said:
Possibility 1 - He knows that it's possible that he may have inadvertently touched butts even if he doesn't specifically recall doing it: "I apologize for touching your butt. It was completely inadvertent, I had absolutely no sexual intent and I will certainly be a lot more careful in the future."

Possibility 2 - He knows that no butt was touched by him: "I deny these allegations."

Possibility 3 - He knows he did it: "I apologize for touching your butt. It was completely inappropriate and a violation of your integrity. I need to be a better person and I will make that effort going forward."

What other plausible possibility exists?
Click to expand...
I think he should have gone with option #1. But just because he hasn't or hasn't yet is no reason to assume #3, especially how you worded it, implies he groped the women in a sexual nature.
 
quadraginta said:
Which is exactly the way I felt over forty years ago when total strangers came up to me at my mother's funeral and said, "I'm sorry for your loss."

It didn't make any sense. They didn't know me, and many of them didn't even know her. Few of the ones that did had even so much as talked to her in years.
Click to expand...

Yeah, except that "sorry" in that context is not an apology. If you're apologising, it makes no sense to apologise for something you didn't do but that someone feels bad about.
 
xjx388 said:
Possibility 1 - He knows that it's possible that he may have inadvertently touched butts even if he doesn't specifically recall doing it: "I apologize for touching your butt. It was completely inadvertent, I had absolutely no sexual intent and I will certainly be a lot more careful in the future."<snip>
Click to expand...

There's the fault.

"It's possible/may have" requires an apology worded in a way that wholly endorses the claim?
 
theprestige said:
That's a figure of speech that only causes problems for poorly trained robots.

Real people who are competent in natural languages have no trouble understanding the differences between a conventional expression of condolences, and a sincere apology for wrongdoing, even if they phrases seem superficially similar.

But you knew that already.
Click to expand...

To be fair, in a growing number of instances over the last 4-5 years, when I offer a sympathetic sorry, I get a bristly "it's not your fault!"

But usually a quick "that's a comforting sorry, not an apology sorry" clears it up. So yes, the sustained inability to grasp that by certain parties in the discussion even after repeated clarification starts to look a bit like feigned ignorance.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom